| Title |
Is the Mandibular Growth Affected by Internal Rigid Fixation?: A Systematic Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12663-016-0968-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Humberto Fernández-Olarte, Andrés Gómez-Delgado, Dayan López-Dávila, Rodolfo Rangel-Perdomo, Gloria Inés Lafaurie, Leandro Chambrone |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate, in animal model-based studies, whether there are mandibular growth alterations, after open reduction and internal rigid fixation with titanium plates and screws. A literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS databases, up to and including August 2015. Surgical reduction and internal rigid fixation (IRF) of induced fractures were compared to non-invasive procedures, in order to investigate if there were alterations in the mandibular growth patterns. Of a total of 624 potentially relevant papers identified through the searching process, five were eligible for inclusion. Three studies using 3-month old New Zealand white rabbits induced fractures of mandibular body or symphysis and internal fixation with titanium microplates and screws, whereas two were based on 6-month old goats with condylar fracture. None of the studies showed statistically significant difference between experimental and control groups. As literature regarding this subject is scarce, and the included studies show low level of evidence, it is not possible to conclude that open reduction and internal rigid fixation with titanium plates and screws cause significant growing alteration of the mandible. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 38% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,562,247
of 22,990,068 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
#158
of 259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,489
of 323,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,990,068 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 259 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,130 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them